TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1399
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x (Appeals)-XII, Kolkata ('ld. CIT(A)'), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (the 'Act'), order dt. 11/07/2014. 2. First we take up the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 1798/Kol/2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. The grounds of appeal for the same read as under:- "1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs. 5,61.305/- treated by learned DCIT as expenses attributable to earning dividend income and did not hold that no expenses have been incurred to earn the said income. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in not holding that provision for leave encashment of Rs. 17,63,884/- is neither statu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee's submission is that only dividend bearing investments should be taken into account for the purpose of working out disallowance under Rule 8D2(ii) of the Rules. 4.2. On consideration of these submissions, we are of the considered opinion that the issue should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction that the disallowance under Rule 8D2(ii) of the Rules, should be determined by applying the following propositions of law:- The Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT (2014) 366 ITR 505(Bom HC), held as follows:- Income-Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income-Exempt income-Assessee made investment in tax free securities- AO disallowed proportionate disallowa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed exempt income during the year. 6.1. The Assessing Officer is directed to apply this proposition of law and work out the disallowance, if any, under Rule 8D2(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. Ground No. 2 is on the disallowance of the provisions for leave encashment. 7.1. We find that the Kolkata 'A' Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2007-08, while adjudicating the same issue remitted the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the same taking into consideration the outcome of the case in SLP civil 22889/2008 of the file of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. Respectfully following the same, we set aside this issue to the file ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is issue at page 11, para 4.2.1. of his order, wherein he has held as follows:- "It is noted that, this issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the appellant's favour by vide order dated December 28, 2007 passed in ITA Nos. 150 and 277 (Kol) of 2007 for the assessment year 2003-04- and in ITA Nos. 567 and 580/Kol/2009 for the assessment year 2004-05. The Hon'ble Tribunal considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v in Sterling Foods (1999) 2371TR 579(SC)) and noted that the same was rendered with reference to section 80HH, whereas the provisions of section 10B were material different. It is also seen that the similar issue has come up for consideration while adjudicating the appellant's a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... direction of the ld. CIT(A) to allow the additional depreciation. The claim for additional depreciation. 14.1. This issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Kolkata 'A' Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2007-08 & 2008-09. The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee by following this order of the Jurisdictional Tribunal. 15. We find no infirmity in the same. In the result, we uphold the finding of the ld. CIT(A) at para 4.2.2., of his order. In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed. 16. Ground No. 3 is on the issue of provision for market to market losses. 16.1. The assessee has accounted for the losses that arose due to exchange rate fluctuatio....